Osborne has done very well considering where we started but this is an over optimistic view of our future. As a result in the increase in our cumulative debt interest payments will hit a billion a week this year. That figure can only go one way until we get into surplus. I really do not see how we will ever achieve that.
Well, a good start would be not to vote in a Labour government in 2015.
Anyway, completely O/T: was very irritated to read reports in papers about how GCSE students would be getting worse grades etc in days leading up to today but delighted to report that Master Cyclefree (Junior) has done v well indeed.
I hope any other PB'ers in the same boat have received equally good news.
Congratulations to him. It is a great feeling when it goes well.
Thank you and to S StClare. He put in some real effort and it showed in his results. I was impressed by the maturity with which he approached his work, which is in some ways even more impressive than the actual results. He's never found exams easy but now he knows that he can do it and how to and I hope it gives him confidence for the future.
A new Yougov poll for London gives Labour 41% (up 4.4% on 2010), Con 34% (down 0.5%) Lib Dem 10% (down 12.1%) UKIP 9% (up 7.3%).
If that poll is accurate then that implies a pretty small swing from Con > Lab. The worry is that the Tories are just building up big majorities in wealthy areas in Zones 1 and 4 and Labour are spreading their vote more effectively in Zones 2 and 3 which is how I see it right now.
So Ozzy is basically discovering the hard way that the UK has a BIG structural deficit. Thanks Gordon. We can have growth or we can have balanced budgets. The balanced budgets route leads via alot of individual pain to growth and a rebalanced, healthier, more efficient economy - but is not electorally a winner. The growth route leads to jam tomorrow, happy punters - and Argentina.
Who'd be a politician eh? No wonder that minister decided to scoot.
The govt are fully aware of the structural deficit, but despite all the publicity suggesting otherwise they have not front loaded the cuts. But cuts are taking place. A few years ago there was furoure about libraries closing (I imagine local authrities picked on libraries as an easy emotive target). I fact only in this financial year have the cuts come in and as in our local area volunteers are keeping libraries open with a plan that should have been announced from the beginning. The cuts have come and more are in the pipeline.
Anyway, completely O/T: was very irritated to read reports in papers about how GCSE students would be getting worse grades etc in days leading up to today but delighted to report that Master Cyclefree (Junior) has done v well indeed.
I hope any other PB'ers in the same boat have received equally good news.
Congrats!
Major had just won an election when I did my GCSE's
I notice that in France Hollande is starting to make noises about rejecting the Merkel / Osborne austerity axis.
He should never have adopted it, the fool.
But that's characteristic of lefties, never leaders, only followers.
Yup. Never cravenly follow the rightwing consensus.
I thought Hollande was following a better path than that of Osborne, that - indeed - it's the path which EdM says that we should be following. And now you're saying that he's been right-wing all along, foolishly..... How can this be?
But hope is worth diddlysquat unless it translates into managing the deficit. I wouldn't swap Ozzy for Balls in a million years - but we have a WAY to go yet before we're even remotely out of the woods.
Oh, certainly. I was not suggesting anything different. But the direction of travel is now very good, and, most importantly, it is good news on multiple fronts simultaneously (growth, unemployment, inflation under control, house prices rising enough to promote a lot of building activity but not getting too overheated, manufacturing improving rapidly, excellent progress of rebalancing from the public sector to the private sector, and so on).
Osborne has done very well considering where we started
What a joke.
Go back to 2010 and look at what Osborne was boasting he could deliver by now.
He's missed every single one of his self imposed targets.
Every. Single. One.
And the thing is his obvious poor performance is the result of all his own actions.
"Swingback" is not some strange untested theory. It simply describes the process whereby governments tend to lose support during the course of a Parliament, and then recover some or all of it, as the election approaches.
Indeed.The crazy thing is, we're sitting here debating the merit's of something that has already happened.
The polling high point for Labour in this Parliament was:
TNS/BRMB
2012-12-10
Con 27% Lab 42% Lib-Dem 9% UKIP 13% Lab Lead 15%
The question is how much more swingback will occur before the election? And will the Lib-Dems get anything back.
I notice that in France Hollande is starting to make noises about rejecting the Merkel / Osborne austerity axis.
He should never have adopted it, the fool.
But that's characteristic of lefties, never leaders, only followers.
Yup. Never cravenly follow the rightwing consensus.
I thought Hollande was following a better path than that of Osborne, that - indeed - it's the path which EdM says that we should be following. And now you're saying that he's been right-wing all along, foolishly..... How can this be?
Hollande changed tack almost as soon as he entered office. He tied France to "deficit reduction targets" through spending cuts in 2012.
"He indicated that the austerity policies France had been compelled to adopt to meet the eurozone’s budget deficit targets were making growth impossible." <- Yep.
I notice that in France Hollande is starting to make noises about rejecting the Merkel / Osborne austerity axis.
He should never have adopted it, the fool.
But that's characteristic of lefties, never leaders, only followers.
Yup. Never cravenly follow the rightwing consensus.
I thought Hollande was following a better path than that of Osborne, that - indeed - it's the path which EdM says that we should be following. And now you're saying that he's been right-wing all along, foolishly..... How can this be?
Hollande changed tack almost as soon as he entered office. He tied France to "deficit reduction targets" through spending cuts in 2012.
"He indicated that the austerity policies France had been compelled to adopt to meet the eurozone’s budget deficit targets were making growth impossible." <- Yep.</p>
Indeed: that's the problem with being in the euro and having to adopt ludicrously deflationary targets at the wrong time in the economic cycle. Amazing given that, that so many left-wing parties are so in favour of the euro. They have made a fetish of the euro at the expense of the poor, the young, the unemployed, the left behind.
"He indicated that the austerity policies France had been compelled to adopt to meet the eurozone’s budget deficit targets were making growth impossible." <- Yep.</p>
So, Ben, how much more public spending than the current 57% or so of GDP should he have gone for?
And, out of curiosity, if public spending at 57% of GDP is 'austerity', what level would be 'profligacy'?
"He indicated that the austerity policies France had been compelled to adopt to meet the eurozone’s budget deficit targets were making growth impossible." <- Yep.</p>
So, Ben, how much more public spending than the current 57% or so of GDP should he have gone for?
And, out of curiosity, if public spending at 57% of GDP is 'austerity', what level would be 'profligacy'?
Anyway, completely O/T: was very irritated to read reports in papers about how GCSE students would be getting worse grades etc in days leading up to today but delighted to report that Master Cyclefree (Junior) has done v well indeed.
I hope any other PB'ers in the same boat have received equally good news.
Congrats!
Major had just won an election when I did my GCSE's
Thatcher had just won the first of her three when I did mine - only they were called 'O' levels then.
I notice that in France Hollande is starting to make noises about rejecting the Merkel / Osborne austerity axis.
He should never have adopted it, the fool.
But that's characteristic of lefties, never leaders, only followers.
Yup. Never cravenly follow the rightwing consensus.
I thought Hollande was following a better path than that of Osborne, that - indeed - it's the path which EdM says that we should be following. And now you're saying that he's been right-wing all along, foolishly..... How can this be?
Hollande changed tack almost as soon as he entered office. He tied France to "deficit reduction targets" through spending cuts in 2012.
"He indicated that the austerity policies France had been compelled to adopt to meet the eurozone’s budget deficit targets were making growth impossible." <- Yep.</p>
Indeed: that's the problem with being in the euro and having to adopt ludicrously deflationary targets at the wrong time in the economic cycle. Amazing given that, that so many left-wing parties are so in favour of the euro. They have made a fetish of the euro at the expense of the poor, the young, the unemployed, the left behind.
Curious.
Indeed. It's amazing what "social democrat" parties in Europe have been willing to sacrifice to "save" the Euro. If Britain were in the EMU would Labour really be telling unemployed Brits that they should just accept their lot in life so the currency can be defended? We talk about wage deflation here as a real terms issue, in many EU countries wages have gone down in absolute terms. Would that be acceptable here? Would Labour really advocate that here like the leftist parties of Europe?
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
More good press for our tax and spend chancellor....
A clear example of how Tories are caught between a rock and a hard place.
Osborne has stepped off the auserity throttle since 2012-13. Which is why there is some GDP growth around.
You want him to step back on that throttle, and undermine the Tory myth that the economy is getting sorted, because that growth would quickly disappear again should Osborne listen.
Osborne is gambling on the performance of the last 4 quarters continuing up to election day. Recent data suggests he's not going to be lucky on that front, but he certainly won't risk undermining any growth there is by foolishly slashing spending now.
Your words are gobbledygook. The govt have spending plans and they are being adhered to, this involves continuing cuts to its non discretionary spending. Its not slashing anything - you are setting up a straw man, its making steady progressive cuts to spending.
http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/002037.html#more ''The black hole's still huge - but Osborne's slowly filling it'' ''Over the course of the parliament the coalition will have tightened by 7% of GDP,'' ''By 2018-19, according to the IFS, a deficit reduction programme equivalent to 11.5% of GDP will have been achieved. Apart from in the special conditions of moving from war to peace, I do not think that has ever been done before.''
Hmm, David Allan Green asked the Metropolitan Police a question which had puzzled me: What was the specific legal provision under which viewing of the Foley murder video might constitute a criminal offence, as the police had stated?
The answer appears to be that there isn't one, or at least not one which the Met can point to:
A new Yougov poll for London gives Labour 41% (up 4.4% on 2010), Con 34% (down 0.5%) Lib Dem 10% (down 12.1%) UKIP 9% (up 7.3%).
If that poll is accurate then that implies a pretty small swing from Con > Lab. The worry is that the Tories are just building up big majorities in wealthy areas in Zones 1 and 4 and Labour are spreading their vote more effectively in Zones 2 and 3 which is how I see it right now.
I agree with the general concept of swingback, but I'm not convinced it applies to Lib Dem to Labour switchers. If there is any degree of Lib Dem swingback, then it's likely to be Labour tactical voters holding their nose in LD-Conservative marginals in order to help locally popular incumbent Lib Dem MPs, which is not remotely helpful to the Tories.
I believe the LD to Labour switchers represent a fundamental realignment, with disaffected left-leaning voters that switched to the Lib Dems moving to Labour. It's essentially a reversion to the time before the SDP was formed.
Given the overwhelming amounts of negative press towards Labour, the poor perception of Ed Miliband and the favourable economic outlook, I don't see much reason to believe the Labour vote will diminish much going forward.
By contrast, I think the UKIP vote is somewhat less solid, and I don't mean to diminish their impact by saying that.
A new Yougov poll for London gives Labour 41% (up 4.4% on 2010), Con 34% (down 0.5%) Lib Dem 10% (down 12.1%) UKIP 9% (up 7.3%).
If that poll is accurate then that implies a pretty small swing from Con > Lab. The worry is that the Tories are just building up big majorities in wealthy areas in Zones 1 and 4 and Labour are spreading their vote more effectively in Zones 2 and 3 which is how I see it right now.
Why is it worrying? It is just a fact...
In no sense can such a conjecture be described as a fact. The poll gives no indication of where within London the votes are concentrated in this poll.
A new Yougov poll for London gives Labour 41% (up 4.4% on 2010), Con 34% (down 0.5%) Lib Dem 10% (down 12.1%) UKIP 9% (up 7.3%).
If that poll is accurate then that implies a pretty small swing from Con > Lab. The worry is that the Tories are just building up big majorities in wealthy areas in Zones 1 and 4 and Labour are spreading their vote more effectively in Zones 2 and 3 which is how I see it right now.
Why is it worrying? It is just a fact...
In no sense can such a conjecture be described as a fact. The poll gives no indication of where within London the votes are concentrated in this poll.
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
Eh? I don't know anyone at my local Labour branch who would want to be in the Euro anymore, and most are disgusted at the austerity that is being forced on poor Europeans just to save it. Please don't conflate a tiny rump of wealthy "Blairites" with "the left"/Labour supporters in general.
@MichaelLCrick: EXCLUSIVE: Alex Salmond sends letter assuring EDF Energy: "we are not opposed to life extensions for Hunterston B & Torness". #C4News 7pm
"Bristol school's improve on GCSE results for tenth year in a row."
THE city council say Bristol's schools have achieved improvements in their GCSE results for the 10th year in a row, despite significant changes this year in the...
More tractor parts are being produced every year, comrades. The quotas of ticks have exceeded all expectations. Applause, all stand, loud cheering. The headline writer and the misplaced apostrophe have been replaced.
I agree with the general concept of swingback, but I'm not convinced it applies to Lib Dem to Labour switchers. If there is any degree of Lib Dem swingback, then it's likely to be Labour tactical voters holding their nose in LD-Conservative marginals in order to help locally popular incumbent Lib Dem MPs, which is not remotely helpful to the Tories.
I believe the LD to Labour switchers represent a fundamental realignment, with disaffected left-leaning voters that switched to the Lib Dems moving to Labour. It's essentially a reversion to the time before the SDP was formed.
Given the overwhelming amounts of negative press towards Labour, the poor perception of Ed Miliband and the favourable economic outlook, I don't see much reason to believe the Labour vote will diminish much going forward.
By contrast, I think the UKIP vote is somewhat less solid, and I don't mean to diminish their impact by saying that.
In support of what you are saying,Lord David Owen,one of the original 4 SDP traitors,has come back into the Labour fold.The big issue for him was the Lansley reorganisation of the NHS and the privatisation that went with it.I know some LibDems who went along with the coalition up until that point too.I cannot see them going back.
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
It's a very good gastropub, but that's it. Amazing it's number 2 on the list: certainly good value for money, lovely atmosphere, but not worth a special trip if you live some distance away. It's still just a gastropub.
@MichaelLCrick: EXCLUSIVE: Alex Salmond sends letter assuring EDF Energy: "we are not opposed to life extensions for Hunterston B & Torness". #C4News 7pm
" Nuclear power was today branded a "busted flush" by First Minister Alex Salmond in the latest clash with Westminster over future energy supply." 2009 Every accusation is a self-accusation.
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
Eh? Labour kept us out; Conservatives wanted in.
The Tories wanted us in the euro?! Who knew.......
EdM has said that he envisages us joining at some point. He has not ruled it out.
More generally, the left in the EU still seem supportive of the euro even though it has caused governments to adopt policies which bear most harshly on those sections of the populace which you'd have thought the Left would want to protect. What amazes me is that despite all that has happened in Europe there is no viable left of centre protest against policies which in other times would have been described as policies designed to help the rich and banks at the expense of the poor.
Hmm, David Allan Green asked the Metropolitan Police a question which had puzzled me: What was the specific legal provision under which viewing of the Foley murder video might constitute a criminal offence, as the police had stated?
The answer appears to be that there isn't one, or at least not one which the Met can point to:
The more likely charges would be for an offence contrary to section 57(1) or section 58(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000. Under those provisions, the offence can be committed by the possession or downloading of a video, and whether someone is guilty or not, depends entirely on their motive, rather than their intention and action. In other words, those provisions create thought crimes.
Mr. Urquhart, I know Erdogan's most Islamist than the secular tradition of Turkey, but surely they know they're playing with fire? If ISIS gains all Syria and Iraq then Jordan and Lebanon may well be next. More than that, the whole of Turkey's southern border will be dominated by the most violent lunatics on the planet.
Seems to me that's been the general pattern since the US funded the mujahideen fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. Outside factions fund and arm jihadist groups to fight their enemies and then they turn into a Frankenstein.
As to the specific example of Turkey Isis seem quite keen on attacking the Kurds in northern Syria.
The single best thing that could be done about the jihadist problem around the world is for countries to stop giving them money and guns on the basis of my enemy's enemy is my friend.
The second best thing would be to stop the Saudis funding Islamic extremism all over the world which people have been complaining about for 30 years but nothing gets done because they're on team petrodollar.
Anyway, completely O/T: was very irritated to read reports in papers about how GCSE students would be getting worse grades etc in days leading up to today but delighted to report that Master Cyclefree (Junior) has done v well indeed.
I hope any other PB'ers in the same boat have received equally good news.
Congrats!
Major had just won an election when I did my GCSE's
My jaw dropped when my daughter told me she had got her grades.It meant I was sentenced to work for the civil service to pay for it.
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
Eh? Labour kept us out; Conservatives wanted in.
Yes, I remember well all those late night negotiations in Maastricht as Neil Kinnock forced through the UK opt out...
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
Eh? Labour kept us out; Conservatives wanted in.
How do you conclude that tories wanted in the Euro? Can you quote the manifesto commitment? In 2001 Labour said --- ''We have made it clear that, provided the economic conditions are met, membership of a successful Euro would bring benefits to Britain in terms of jobs, investment and trade. So, in principle, we are in favour of joining a successful single currency.''
Interestingly in1997 Labour promised a referendum on the single currency - I must have missed that. Laughably they promised to reform the UN. Hilariously they promised to 'lead reform of the EU'. But then they also promised to protect the veto on immigration as well.
Really some wag should have just read out the 97 manifesto on the Edinburgh Fringe it would have walked away with the 'best joke' award.
In 2001 and 2005, there was swingback.....from the government TO the opposition.
In 2010, it's true the main opposition party lost ground in the final months, but that support went mainly to the Lib Dems; I think Labour's 2010 performance was below their average poll ratings in the whole parliament (admittedly they were a little higher than in the summer of 2009, but that was a lowpoint brought about by expenses).
There's really no evidence whatsoever of governments reliably regaining support just because an election's coming.
August 1996 ICM had Government 33, Opposition 45.
What's it called when both lose ground? Swingoff?
Before then, of course, pre-GE polls had fatal methodological flaws so should be pretty much disregarded.
ICM gave Labour the smallest leads of any company in 1996, but even then, the leads ranged between 12% and 25%. In December, one ICM poll gave Labour a 20% lead.
So you're having to cherry pick data to "prove" that "swingback" is a thing.
I'm cherry-picking data to "prove" that it's bollox.
Doesn't this in itself tell you something?
Pose the question another way. Why should governments have a "tendency" to recover?
What's the mechanism by which thousands or millions of voters change their political minds and become more favourable to the Government, no matter who is in power and what is happening in the country?
Simply that most normal voters pay very little attention to politics until near the election (it's a gradually increasing trend over time, explaining why "swingback" is a gradual process).
When they do pay attention, the government holds a lot of the cards - in terms of oxygen, agenda setting, ability to do stuff, perceived authority, etc.
That's why divided parties (undermining authority) and competence /incompetence are what can kill governments.
Anyway, completely O/T: was very irritated to read reports in papers about how GCSE students would be getting worse grades etc in days leading up to today but delighted to report that Master Cyclefree (Junior) has done v well indeed.
I hope any other PB'ers in the same boat have received equally good news.
Congrats!
Major had just won an election when I did my GCSE's
Thatcher had just won the first of her three when I did mine - only they were called 'O' levels then.
I did my O levels when Harold Macmillan was preparing to sweep the country with 49.4% of the votes.
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
Eh? Labour kept us out; Conservatives wanted in.
The Tories wanted us in the euro?! Who knew.......
EdM has said that he envisages us joining at some point. He has not ruled it out.
More generally, the left in the EU still seem supportive of the euro even though it has caused governments to adopt policies which bear most harshly on those sections of the populace which you'd have thought the Left would want to protect. What amazes me is that despite all that has happened in Europe there is no viable left of centre protest against policies which in other times would have been described as policies designed to help the rich and banks at the expense of the poor.
The right in the EU also likes the Euro. It is not as if Angela Merkel is campaigning to take Germany out.
As for Britain, look at the history -- Labour kept us out of the snake (for which Jim Callaghan was condemned by the Leader of the Opposition, Mrs Thatcher) and out of the Euro. It is Conservative governments which took us into Europe in the first place, shadowed the DM, then joined the ERM.
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
Eh? Labour kept us out; Conservatives wanted in.
The Tories wanted us in the euro?! Who knew.......
EdM has said that he envisages us joining at some point. He has not ruled it out.
More generally, the left in the EU still seem supportive of the euro even though it has caused governments to adopt policies which bear most harshly on those sections of the populace which you'd have thought the Left would want to protect. What amazes me is that despite all that has happened in Europe there is no viable left of centre protest against policies which in other times would have been described as policies designed to help the rich and banks at the expense of the poor.
The right in the EU also likes the Euro. It is not as if Angela Merkel is campaigning to take Germany out.
As for Britain, look at the history -- Labour kept us out of the snake (for which Jim Callaghan was condemned by the Leader of the Opposition, Mrs Thatcher) and out of the Euro. It is Conservative governments which took us into Europe in the first place, shadowed the DM, then joined the ERM.
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
Eh? Labour kept us out; Conservatives wanted in.
The Tories wanted us in the euro?! Who knew.......
EdM has said that he envisages us joining at some point. He has not ruled it out.
More generally, the left in the EU still seem supportive of the euro even though it has caused governments to adopt policies which bear most harshly on those sections of the populace which you'd have thought the Left would want to protect. What amazes me is that despite all that has happened in Europe there is no viable left of centre protest against policies which in other times would have been described as policies designed to help the rich and banks at the expense of the poor.
The right in the EU also likes the Euro. It is not as if Angela Merkel is campaigning to take Germany out.
As for Britain, look at the history -- Labour kept us out of the snake (for which Jim Callaghan was condemned by the Leader of the Opposition, Mrs Thatcher) and out of the Euro. It is Conservative governments which took us into Europe in the first place, shadowed the DM, then joined the ERM.
Spot on Mr DJL.
It;s one of the more interesting aspects of UK politics how the conservatives and labour have swapped positions of the EU.
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
Eh? Labour kept us out; Conservatives wanted in.
The Tories wanted us in the euro?! Who knew.......
EdM has said that he envisages us joining at some point. He has not ruled it out.
More generally, the left in the EU still seem supportive of the euro even though it has caused governments to adopt policies which bear most harshly on those sections of the populace which you'd have thought the Left would want to protect. What amazes me is that despite all that has happened in Europe there is no viable left of centre protest against policies which in other times would have been described as policies designed to help the rich and banks at the expense of the poor.
The right in the EU also likes the Euro. It is not as if Angela Merkel is campaigning to take Germany out.
As for Britain, look at the history -- Labour kept us out of the snake (for which Jim Callaghan was condemned by the Leader of the Opposition, Mrs Thatcher) and out of the Euro. It is Conservative governments which took us into Europe in the first place, shadowed the DM, then joined the ERM.
To curb inflation. Labour will maintain the value of the pound within the European Exchange Rate Mechanism. Manifesto 1992
By all means make your point, but try to maintain even a passing acquaintance with the facts...
And still our politicians blather on about how this is nothing to do with religion; even Cameron was at it last night.
What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?
"What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?"
In a nutshell.
And yet on this I think the politicians are more or less right. Jihadists do not strike me as particularly pious people. The attraction is the macho camaraderie, the feeling of having a cause and a purpose in life. I can understand why going to join ISIS is so attractive to the disaffected, to petty criminals - to young men who feel bored and emasculated.
And finally - gut feel. This is of course subjective, by I am very struck by something really odd about Labour at the moment: they don't look at all like a party getting ready to govern. The Shadow Cabinet (incidentally one of the weakest of modern times) seem to be going through the motions, but where is the energy and enthusiasm about what they would like to do in office? There isn't any. If you want opposition energy and enthusiasm, you need to look at UKIP, where the leadership and members are all fired up and keen to tell us about what they would do differently. The contrast is stark.
Lab's problem is immigration. Supply and demand is like gravity and doesn't just switch off when it contradicts PC. The consequences of what they did was partially hidden by the credit bubble until 2008 and now it's not so they're stuck.
Not wanting to say anything about immigration (edit: is also) why left of centre parties will be inclined to be more left wing populist economically to try and compensate.
This ought to be a good opportunity for centre right parties if they were genuinely conservative but it's not because their donors want unlimited mass immigration.
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
Eh? Labour kept us out; Conservatives wanted in.
The Tories wanted us in the euro?! Who knew.......
EdM has said that he envisages us joining at some point. He has not ruled it out.
More generally, the left in the EU still seem supportive of the euro even though it has caused governments to adopt policies which bear most harshly on those sections of the populace which you'd have thought the Left would want to protect. What amazes me is that despite all that has happened in Europe there is no viable left of centre protest against policies which in other times would have been described as policies designed to help the rich and banks at the expense of the poor.
The right in the EU also likes the Euro. It is not as if Angela Merkel is campaigning to take Germany out.
As for Britain, look at the history -- Labour kept us out of the snake (for which Jim Callaghan was condemned by the Leader of the Opposition, Mrs Thatcher) and out of the Euro. It is Conservative governments which took us into Europe in the first place, shadowed the DM, then joined the ERM.
To curb inflation. Labour will maintain the value of the pound within the European Exchange Rate Mechanism. Manifesto 1992
By all means make your point, but try to maintain even a passing acquaintance with the facts...
I have given the facts. What you offer is a counter-factual: what might have happened if Labour had won in 1992. What it amounts to is that both main parties have always included euroenthusiasts and eurosceptics. The latter is now seen as right wing but it used to be the left which was most fiercely opposed to Europe. Nonetheless, the most significant steps in European integration, including but not limited to currency union, were all taken by Conservative governments.
But hope is worth diddlysquat unless it translates into managing the deficit. I wouldn't swap Ozzy for Balls in a million years - but we have a WAY to go yet before we're even remotely out of the woods.
Oh, certainly. I was not suggesting anything different. But the direction of travel is now very good, and, most importantly, it is good news on multiple fronts simultaneously (growth, unemployment, inflation under control, house prices rising enough to promote a lot of building activity but not getting too overheated, manufacturing improving rapidly, excellent progress on rebalancing from the public sector to the private sector, and so on).
The problem is that Brown left us with a humungeous structural deficit. Osborne has barely started with this - mosyt of the reduction has been the cylical stuff which is easy.
Where he has made efforts - like with councils - he's p1ssed the money away on his pet schemes.
Hmm, David Allan Green asked the Metropolitan Police a question which had puzzled me: What was the specific legal provision under which viewing of the Foley murder video might constitute a criminal offence, as the police had stated?
The answer appears to be that there isn't one, or at least not one which the Met can point to:
In 2001 and 2005, there was swingback.....from the government TO the opposition.
snip
August 1996 ICM had Government 33, Opposition 45.
What's it called when both lose ground? Swingoff?
Before then, of course, pre-GE polls had fatal methodological flaws so should be pretty much disregarded.
ICM gave Labour the smallest leads of any company in 1996, but even then, the leads ranged between 12% and 25%. In December, one ICM poll gave Labour a 20% lead.
So you're having to cherry pick data to "prove" that "swingback" is a thing.
I'm cherry-picking data to "prove" that it's bollox.
Doesn't this in itself tell you something?
Pose the question another way. Why should governments have a "tendency" to recover?
What's the mechanism by which thousands or millions of voters change their political minds and become more favourable to the Government, no matter who is in power and what is happening in the country?
Simply that most normal voters pay very little attention to politics until near the election (it's a gradually increasing trend over time, explaining why "swingback" is a gradual process).
When they do pay attention, the government holds a lot of the cards
So why have the Tories have been static in the polls for ages?
If you're going to argue that opinion only gets more favourable to Govts in the immediate run up to elections you'll be on even shakier ground and having to cherry pick data even more.
There's just too many problems with "swingback" theory for you Tories to pin your hopes in it I'm afraid.
1) The evidence supporting it is pretty flimsy, heavily relying on dodgy polls pre Mid 90s.
2) There are plenty of examples of where it hasn't happened. That alone undermines the "theory" (as any natural scientist would tell you: the discovery of a single object travelling faster than the speed of light would be enough to have to rip up every physics textbook)
3) There are too few data points to generalise. Even if you take every election for which we have data it's still a focus group rather than full poll, so to speak.
4) Even "swingback" theorists admit that events can change the picture. Which amounts to admitting that politics is a fluid and unpredictable business, and as such can't be forecast "modelled" with neat statistics and reductive assumptions.
Simply that most normal voters pay very little attention to politics until near the election (it's a gradually increasing trend over time, explaining why "swingback" is a gradual process).
When they do pay attention, the government holds a lot of the cards
So why have the Tories have been static in the polls for ages?
If you're going to argue that opinion only gets more favourable to Govts in the immediate run up to elections you'll be on even shakier ground and having to cherry pick data even more.
There's just too many problems with "swingback" theory for you Tories to pin your hopes in it I'm afraid.
1) The evidence supporting it is pretty flimsy, heavily relying on dodgy polls pre Mid 90s.
2) There are plenty of examples of where it hasn't happened. That alone undermines the "theory" (as any natural scientist would tell you: the discovery of a single object travelling faster than the speed of light would be enough to have to rip up every physics textbook)
3) There are too few data points to generalise. Even if you take every election for which we have data it's still a focus group rather than full poll, so to speak.
4) Even "swingback" theorists admit that events can change the picture. Which amounts to admitting that politics is a fluid and unpredictable business, and as such can't be forecast "modelled" with neat statistics and reductive assumptions.
For starters.
All I am saying is that the Government has an advantage. Not particularly insightful, I'll admit, but defensible.
I'm generally not a believer in extrapolating trends. They are worth observrving to understand *why* they are happening, but it is the underlying drivers that matter.
That's why @IshmaelX's posting of trends (even if they are leads not shares) is interesting.
Just spent a lovely afternoon in Salcombe, Devon. Among other things ate some very tasty crab. At the carpark a bloke was walking his dog around. It stopped and crapped. Lovely. When it had finished the owner carried on his merry way. As I am wont to do when I see this I remonstrated and invited him to clean up after his animal. He told me to F off, then got into his car. As he drove off I could not help but notice the UKIP sticker on his rear windscreen. It was a perfect moment. And, yes, I know it tells us nothing about anything. I'm sure some Tories don't clean up after their pooches either :-)
In 2001 and 2005, there was swingback.....from the government TO the opposition.
snip
August 1996 ICM had Government 33, Opposition 45.
What's it called when both lose ground? Swingoff?
Before then, of course, pre-GE polls had fatal methodological flaws so should be pretty much disregarded.
ICM gave Labour the smallest leads of any company in 1996, but even then, the leads ranged between 12% and 25%. In December, one ICM poll gave Labour a 20% lead.
So you're having to cherry pick data to "prove" that "swingback" is a thing.
I'm cherry-picking data to "prove" that it's bollox.
Doesn't this in itself tell you something?
Pose the question another way. Why should governments have a "tendency" to recover?
What's the mechanism by which thousands or millions of voters change their political minds and become more favourable to the Government, no matter who is in power and what is happening in the country?
Simply that most normal voters pay very little attention to politics until near the election (it's a gradually increasing trend over time, explaining why "swingback" is a gradual process).
When they do pay attention, the government holds a lot of the cards
So why have the Tories have been static in the polls for ages?
If you're going to argue that opinion only gets more favourable to Govts in the immediate run up to elections you'll be on even shakier ground and having to cherry pick data even more.
There's just too many problems with "swingback" theory for you Tories to pin your hopes in it I'm afraid.
1) The evidence supporting it is pretty flimsy, heavily relying on dodgy polls pre Mid 90s.
2) There are plenty of examples of where it hasn't happened. That alone undermines the "theory" (as any natural scientist would tell you: the discovery of a single object travelling faster than the speed of light would be enough to have to rip up every physics textbook)
3) There are too few data points to generalise. Even if you take every election for which we have data it's still a focus group rather than full poll, so to speak.
4) Even "swingback" theorists admit that events can change the picture. Which amounts to admitting that politics is a fluid and unpredictable business, and as such can't be forecast "modelled" with neat statistics and reductive assumptions.
For starters.
Labour's lead has gone from about 11% to about 3% in the last 18 months. Have added a new tab to my spreadsheet to demonstrate this:
While my illness prevented me having a huge bet on Taghrooda this afternoon (he jests), the delirium doesn't prevent me making the observation that if anyone should have learned anything from 2010, it's that large shifts of opinion (which may in themselves be transitory) can occur during the campaign and that assuming stability now will equal stability up to and including May 7th next may be foolish.
I genuinely don't know how the 2015 GE will go - experience tells me however the result will do its best to inconvenience as many people as possible.
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
Eh? Labour kept us out; Conservatives wanted in.
The Tories wanted us in the euro?! Who knew.......
EdM has said that he envisages us joining at some point. He has not ruled it out.
More generally, the left in the EU still seem supportive of the euro even though it has caused governments to adopt policies which bear most harshly on those sections of the populace which you'd have thought the Left would want to protect. What amazes me is that despite all that has happened in Europe there is no viable left of centre protest against policies which in other times would have been described as policies designed to help the rich and banks at the expense of the poor.
The right in the EU also likes the Euro. It is not as if Angela Merkel is campaigning to take Germany out.
As for Britain, look at the history -- Labour kept us out of the snake (for which Jim Callaghan was condemned by the Leader of the Opposition, Mrs Thatcher) and out of the Euro. It is Conservative governments which took us into Europe in the first place, shadowed the DM, then joined the ERM.
To curb inflation. Labour will maintain the value of the pound within the European Exchange Rate Mechanism. Manifesto 1992
By all means make your point, but try to maintain even a passing acquaintance with the facts...
Labour kept us out; Conservatives wanted us in (the Euro)
What it amounts to is that both main parties have always included euroenthusiasts and eurosceptics.
You travelled a long way in a short time there, well done sir!
@bbclaurak: I'm reliably informed the #newsnight house band on tonight's #indyref special is @fotdp - Federation of the Disco Pimp, for the unititiated!
Anyone who saw the late night show from the Commonwealth Games will recognise them
I have given the facts. What you offer is a counter-factual: what might have happened if Labour had won in 1992. What it amounts to is that both main parties have always included euroenthusiasts and eurosceptics. The latter is now seen as right wing but it used to be the left which was most fiercely opposed to Europe. Nonetheless, the most significant steps in European integration, including but not limited to currency union, were all taken by Conservative governments.
And yet:
"ANDREW MARR:
What is the Labour Party policy on the Euro? Is the party still committed to join the Euro eventually?
ED MILIBAND:
Well I don't foresee us going in now or indeed in the next parliament, in the foreseeable future. I don't think that's going …
ANDREW MARR:
(over) In your political lifetime?
ED MILIBAND:
Well I think it's very hard to see that happening. I don't …
They're 8 to top score. That *may* be value. My concern is that rain seems to be possible during the race, and in wet weather downforce (where the team lags behind both Mercedes and Red Bull) is lovely because it gives you more grip, which is at a premium when you're racing on a wet track.
But then, that's why odds change as an event draws nearer.
And still our politicians blather on about how this is nothing to do with religion; even Cameron was at it last night.
What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?
"What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?"
In a nutshell.
And yet on this I think the politicians are more or less right. Jihadists do not strike me as particularly pious people. The attraction is the macho camaraderie, the feeling of having a cause and a purpose in life. I can understand why going to join ISIS is so attractive to the disaffected, to petty criminals - to young men who feel bored and emasculated.
1) I read the Koran etc after 9/11 (or 7/7 i forget which) so i'd know - as would anyone else who did the same - if the political class are lying through their teeth on this issue (as they generally do when anything contradicts PC).
2) The assumption that it only counts as religious when people use religion as a genuine reason for doing something but doesn't count when people use religion as an *excuse* for doing something they wanted to do anyway would be one of the reasons the political class has been so wrong on this issue for so many years.
edit: 3) You can also have a bit of both. A small group of pious people set up a jihadist group. Some outside faction funds them on a my enemy's enemy is my friend basis. Other people who fancy a bit of culturally sanctioned mayhem join for some fun.
And still our politicians blather on about how this is nothing to do with religion; even Cameron was at it last night.
What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?
"What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?"
In a nutshell.
I am not sure if it is to do with religion. I cannot help but think that some of these British nutters seem of the 'my gods bigger than your god' variety, with a bit of 'I wanna be in your gang' thrown in.
I would like to take the opportunity to question the validity of the BBC (and other outlets?) giving quasi legitimacy to these people by refering to them as 'The Islamic State'. Its certainly questionable if they are 'Islamic' and they are not a legitimate state. But the BBC are happy to give them the nomenclature they crave.
Scotland’s fishing leaders have warned that independence could mean them getting a worse deal from Europe because the largest EU countries “win on the big issues”.
The Scottish Fishermen’s Federation (SFF) published an analysis of both sides’ claims in the referendum debate that highlighted a series of major problems that separation would create for the industry.
The document described as “very optimistic” the SNP’s claims that Scotland could negotiate EU membership between a Yes vote next month and leaving the UK in March 2016.
It said Richard Lochhead, the SNP’s Fisheries Minister, acknowledged that breaking up the UK would create a “contest” for its fishing quote between Scottish trawler men and their peers south of the Border.
In 2001 and 2005, there was swingback.....from the government TO the opposition.
snip
August 1996 ICM had Government 33, Opposition 45.
What's it called when both lose ground? Swingoff?
Before then, of course, pre-GE polls had fatal methodological flaws so should be pretty much disregarded.
ICM gave Labour the smallest leads of any company in 1996, but even then, the leads ranged between 12% and 25%. In December, one ICM poll gave Labour a 20% lead.
So you're having to cherry pick data to "prove" that "swingback" is a thing.
I'm cherry-picking data to "prove" that it's bollox.
Doesn't this in itself tell you something?
Pose the question another way. Why should governments have a "tendency" to recover?
What's the mechanism by which thousands or millions of voters change their political minds and become more favourable to the Government, no matter who is in power and what is happening in the country?
Simply that most normal voters pay very little attention to politics until near the election (it's a gradually increasing trend over time, explaining why "swingback" is a gradual process).
When they do pay attention, the government holds a lot of the cards
So why have the Tories have been static in the polls for ages?
Just spent a lovely afternoon in Salcombe, Devon. Among other things ate some very tasty crab. At the carpark a bloke was walking his dog around. It stopped and crapped. Lovely. When it had finished the owner carried on his merry way. As I am wont to do when I see this I remonstrated and invited him to clean up after his animal. He told me to F off, then got into his car. As he drove off I could not help but notice the UKIP sticker on his rear windscreen. It was a perfect moment. And, yes, I know it tells us nothing about anything. I'm sure some Tories don't clean up after their pooches either :-)
I suspect all political persuasions are guilty of the dog cr@p problem,round here they sometimes scoop it up in pink plastic bags and hang it on trees and fences. The local paper always has a letter from "Disgusted of ****" complaining of dog cr@p on the pavements,even takes priority of the trolls moaning about local councillors. Currently in Normandy,amazed at the phenominal achievement of D day.
F1: ok, not backing the 8 on Williams to top score.
Yet.
Apparently 80% chance of rain during qualifying. If it's wet, that'll help Red Bull a lot, be sort of the same for Mercedes and harm Williams, shoving them down the order. May be worth backing them to top score *after* qualifying, but that'll be something that can only be assessed at the time.
Mr. Dee, indeed. It's a baffling custom. Who the hell plans ahead to bag the leavings of their hound, and then thinks it'd be the best thing to leave it hanging on a branch or suchlike?
Cretins.
Mr. P, Bercow's an arse. His behaviour over the new clerk is dubious at best.
Just spent a lovely afternoon in Salcombe, Devon. Among other things ate some very tasty crab. At the carpark a bloke was walking his dog around. It stopped and crapped. Lovely. When it had finished the owner carried on his merry way. As I am wont to do when I see this I remonstrated and invited him to clean up after his animal. He told me to F off, then got into his car. As he drove off I could not help but notice the UKIP sticker on his rear windscreen. It was a perfect moment. And, yes, I know it tells us nothing about anything. I'm sure some Tories don't clean up after their pooches either :-)
No - I think you will find its very illustrative. Lets face it Janice Atkinson was very direct in her opinions too.
Anybody any views on Bradford West result in the General Election?Current odds Labour 1/3 Respect 3/1 Tory 33/1 Lib Dem 100/1 Ukip 100/1
This was my best ever political betting win.My money won't be on GG this time.Bradford Labour have has had time to reflect and respond.33% for 9 months is a better return than the bank.
And still our politicians blather on about how this is nothing to do with religion; even Cameron was at it last night.
What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?
"What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?"
In a nutshell.
I am not sure if it is to do with religion. I cannot help but think that some of these British nutters seem of the 'my gods bigger than your god' variety, with a bit of 'I wanna be in your gang' thrown in.
I would like to take the opportunity to question the validity of the BBC (and other outlets?) giving quasi legitimacy to these people by refering to them as 'The Islamic State'. Its certainly questionable if they are 'Islamic' and they are not a legitimate state. But the BBC are happy to give them the nomenclature they crave.
They call themselves those kind of names for a reason. Regardless of whether or not they are genuinely religious - whatever that means - a reason for using those sort of names exists.
Even if it's just marketing there's a reason that particular marketing works and so the political class quibbling over whether it's genuinely religious or not - whatever that means - is a red herring.
But hope is worth diddlysquat unless it translates into managing the deficit. I wouldn't swap Ozzy for Balls in a million years - but we have a WAY to go yet before we're even remotely out of the woods.
Oh, certainly. I was not suggesting anything different. But the direction of travel is now very good, and, most importantly, it is good news on multiple fronts simultaneously (growth, unemployment, inflation under control, house prices rising enough to promote a lot of building activity but not getting too overheated, manufacturing improving rapidly, excellent progress on rebalancing from the public sector to the private sector, and so on).
The problem is that Brown left us with a humungeous structural deficit. Osborne has barely started with this - mosyt of the reduction has been the cylical stuff which is easy.
Where he has made efforts - like with councils - he's p1ssed the money away on his pet schemes.
'Over the course of the parliament the coalition will have tightened by 7% of GDP,' 'It is important to be aware, however, that the goalposts have been moved. They were moved in November 2011 when the OBR changed its view on the economy’s productive potential, so more of the deficit was deemed to be structural – and thus requiring tax hikes or spending cuts – and less of it cyclical, in other words disappearing with the recovery.' 'By 2018-19, according to the IFS, a deficit reduction programme equivalent to 11.5% of GDP will have been achieved. Apart from in the special conditions of moving from war to peace, I do not think that has ever been done before.'
As it should be because I asked for a copy of the Tory party's longtermeconomicplan and you published a government statement call Budget 2014.These are quite separate documents.
May I request again a copy of the Tory party's longtermeconomicplan or is it a work of fiction?
Mr. Pete, whilst fair comment it does neglect that no party really has a long term economic plan. You can't differentiate the parties when they're equally rubbish, or all agree (cf climate change).
The original concept of swingback, as I defined it, applied strictly to average Opposition by-election performance. Every opposition since the War has obtained a lower percentage swing at the subsequent general election compared to by-elections - the difference comprises the "swingback" to government, and is usually close to a 4% swing.
Different analysis must be applied to opinion polls. See Fisher, etc.
Mr. Pete, whilst fair comment it does neglect that no party really has a long term economic plan. You can't differentiate the parties when they're equally rubbish, or all agree (cf climate change).
spot on Mr D.
As the election approaches we're back to my Qxbridge PPE multi millionaire is better than your Oxbridge PPE multi millionaire
Just to add I agree that Islam in itself isn't the direct cause of the large-scale jihadist problem but the way the political class bends over backwards to prevent discussing it is an example of how the political class won't deal with problems that contradict PC so those problems get bigger over time.
Comments
He should never have adopted it, the fool.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28885753
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28878432
Major had just won an election when I did my GCSE's
Go back to 2010 and look at what Osborne was boasting he could deliver by now.
He's missed every single one of his self imposed targets.
Every. Single. One.
And the thing is his obvious poor performance is the result of all his own actions.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/21/business/international/france-acknowledges-economic-malaise-blaming-austerity.html?_r=0
"He indicated that the austerity policies France had been compelled to adopt to meet the eurozone’s budget deficit targets were making growth impossible." <- Yep.
Curious.
And, out of curiosity, if public spending at 57% of GDP is 'austerity', what level would be 'profligacy'?
It never ceases to amaze me that the left in Britain moan about high unemployment here but when faced with the reality of 25% unemployment in Spain they will still defend the Euro and many still lament that we didn't join in.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dE0wZTMyZW1nYko1TE15MDVJVF8zYXc&usp=drive_web
Basildon, for example, is at the bottom of the list because the Tory majority over Labour is 5,772 and the LD vote was 5,977.
http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/002037.html#more
''The black hole's still huge - but Osborne's slowly filling it''
''Over the course of the parliament the coalition will have tightened by 7% of GDP,''
''By 2018-19, according to the IFS, a deficit reduction programme equivalent to 11.5% of GDP will have been achieved. Apart from in the special conditions of moving from war to peace, I do not think that has ever been done before.''
The govt are being sound and sensible.
The answer appears to be that there isn't one, or at least not one which the Met can point to:
http://blogs.ft.com/david-allen-green/2014/08/21/is-viewing-a-video-a-criminal-offence-under-terrorism-law/?ftcamp=published_links/rss/world_uk_politics/feed//product
I believe the LD to Labour switchers represent a fundamental realignment, with disaffected left-leaning voters that switched to the Lib Dems moving to Labour. It's essentially a reversion to the time before the SDP was formed.
Given the overwhelming amounts of negative press towards Labour, the poor perception of Ed Miliband and the favourable economic outlook, I don't see much reason to believe the Labour vote will diminish much going forward.
By contrast, I think the UKIP vote is somewhat less solid, and I don't mean to diminish their impact by saying that.
@MichaelLCrick: EXCLUSIVE: Alex Salmond sends letter assuring EDF Energy: "we are not opposed to life extensions for Hunterston B & Torness". #C4News 7pm
Apologies for the delayed response - have been having coffee with a mate in Toronto.
I'm a fan of privately owned medium sized companies with a multi-generational stewardship approach to business. Damn it, who'd have guessed ;-)
"Bristol school's improve on GCSE results for tenth year in a row."
THE city council say Bristol's schools have achieved improvements in their GCSE results for the 10th year in a row, despite significant changes this year in the...
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news#ixzz3B2e7WCJJ
More tractor parts are being produced every year, comrades. The quotas of ticks have exceeded all expectations. Applause, all stand, loud cheering. The headline writer and the misplaced apostrophe have been replaced.
TripAdvisor lists 17,143 restaurants in London.
Number 2 on the list is The Andover Arms in Ravenscourt Park, London.
Anyone been there? I'm just wondering if it really is as good as that.
http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g186338-d3599802-Reviews-The_Andover_Arms-London_England.html
Every accusation is a self-accusation.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/alex-salmond-nuclear-power-is-a-busted-flush-1.902835
EdM has said that he envisages us joining at some point. He has not ruled it out.
More generally, the left in the EU still seem supportive of the euro even though it has caused governments to adopt policies which bear most harshly on those sections of the populace which you'd have thought the Left would want to protect. What amazes me is that despite all that has happened in Europe there is no viable left of centre protest against policies which in other times would have been described as policies designed to help the rich and banks at the expense of the poor.
As to the specific example of Turkey Isis seem quite keen on attacking the Kurds in northern Syria.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Kurdish–Islamist_conflict_(2013-present)
The single best thing that could be done about the jihadist problem around the world is for countries to stop giving them money and guns on the basis of my enemy's enemy is my friend.
The second best thing would be to stop the Saudis funding Islamic extremism all over the world which people have been complaining about for 30 years but nothing gets done because they're on team petrodollar.
Interestingly in1997 Labour promised a referendum on the single currency - I must have missed that. Laughably they promised to reform the UN. Hilariously they promised to 'lead reform of the EU'. But then they also promised to protect the veto on immigration as well.
Really some wag should have just read out the 97 manifesto on the Edinburgh Fringe it would have walked away with the 'best joke' award.
They did act. They trained thousands of fighters in Jordan and flooded Syria with money and weapons.
"What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?"
In a nutshell.
When they do pay attention, the government holds a lot of the cards - in terms of oxygen, agenda setting, ability to do stuff, perceived authority, etc.
That's why divided parties (undermining authority) and competence /incompetence are what can kill governments.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/293759/37630_Budget_2014_Web_Accessible.pdf
Free at the point of use.
As for Britain, look at the history -- Labour kept us out of the snake (for which Jim Callaghan was condemned by the Leader of the Opposition, Mrs Thatcher) and out of the Euro. It is Conservative governments which took us into Europe in the first place, shadowed the DM, then joined the ERM.
It;s one of the more interesting aspects of UK politics how the conservatives and labour have swapped positions of the EU.
Manifesto 1992
By all means make your point, but try to maintain even a passing acquaintance with the facts...
Not wanting to say anything about immigration (edit: is also) why left of centre parties will be inclined to be more left wing populist economically to try and compensate.
This ought to be a good opportunity for centre right parties if they were genuinely conservative but it's not because their donors want unlimited mass immigration.
The problem is that Brown left us with a humungeous structural deficit. Osborne has barely started with this - mosyt of the reduction has been the cylical stuff which is easy.
Where he has made efforts - like with councils - he's p1ssed the money away on his pet schemes.
Just saw on the BBC ISIS seemingly wanted £80m for the journalist they murdered. Sounds like a number big enough to avoid ever getting paid it.
If you're going to argue that opinion only gets more favourable to Govts in the immediate run up to elections you'll be on even shakier ground and having to cherry pick data even more.
There's just too many problems with "swingback" theory for you Tories to pin your hopes in it I'm afraid.
1) The evidence supporting it is pretty flimsy, heavily relying on dodgy polls pre Mid 90s.
2) There are plenty of examples of where it hasn't happened. That alone undermines the "theory" (as any natural scientist would tell you: the discovery of a single object travelling faster than the speed of light would be enough to have to rip up every physics textbook)
3) There are too few data points to generalise. Even if you take every election for which we have data it's still a focus group rather than full poll, so to speak.
4) Even "swingback" theorists admit that events can change the picture. Which amounts to admitting that politics is a fluid and unpredictable business, and as such can't be forecast "modelled" with neat statistics and reductive assumptions.
For starters.
I'm generally not a believer in extrapolating trends. They are worth observrving to understand *why* they are happening, but it is the underlying drivers that matter.
That's why @IshmaelX's posting of trends (even if they are leads not shares) is interesting.
http://goo.gl/9RfFdf
True, it is a combination of factors, CON up a touch, LAB down a touch...
While my illness prevented me having a huge bet on Taghrooda this afternoon (he jests), the delirium doesn't prevent me making the observation that if anyone should have learned anything from 2010, it's that large shifts of opinion (which may in themselves be transitory) can occur during the campaign and that assuming stability now will equal stability up to and including May 7th next may be foolish.
I genuinely don't know how the 2015 GE will go - experience tells me however the result will do its best to inconvenience as many people as possible.
Still Team HBetts but early doors....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28886663
Anyone who saw the late night show from the Commonwealth Games will recognise them
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/28889812
They're 8 to top score. That *may* be value. My concern is that rain seems to be possible during the race, and in wet weather downforce (where the team lags behind both Mercedes and Red Bull) is lovely because it gives you more grip, which is at a premium when you're racing on a wet track.
But then, that's why odds change as an event draws nearer.
Oh, and Rossi (an American rumoured to be in the running for a Haas seat) will replace Chilton at Spa:
http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2014/8/16224.html
Edited extra bit: also worth mentioning both times I've backed this bet in the past it failed.
1) I read the Koran etc after 9/11 (or 7/7 i forget which) so i'd know - as would anyone else who did the same - if the political class are lying through their teeth on this issue (as they generally do when anything contradicts PC).
2) The assumption that it only counts as religious when people use religion as a genuine reason for doing something but doesn't count when people use religion as an *excuse* for doing something they wanted to do anyway would be one of the reasons the political class has been so wrong on this issue for so many years.
edit:
3) You can also have a bit of both. A small group of pious people set up a jihadist group. Some outside faction funds them on a my enemy's enemy is my friend basis. Other people who fancy a bit of culturally sanctioned mayhem join for some fun.
I would like to take the opportunity to question the validity of the BBC (and other outlets?) giving quasi legitimacy to these people by refering to them as 'The Islamic State'. Its certainly questionable if they are 'Islamic' and they are not a legitimate state. But the BBC are happy to give them the nomenclature they crave.
At least when they tried to stage American Football at Murrayfield they only sold tickets for seats that could be seen by the TV cameras
Unlucky John..
Edit: snip blah blah blah from @Hugh
You're overthinking it.
The local paper always has a letter from "Disgusted of ****" complaining of dog cr@p on the pavements,even takes priority of the trolls moaning about local councillors.
Currently in Normandy,amazed at the phenominal achievement of D day.
Yet.
Apparently 80% chance of rain during qualifying. If it's wet, that'll help Red Bull a lot, be sort of the same for Mercedes and harm Williams, shoving them down the order. May be worth backing them to top score *after* qualifying, but that'll be something that can only be assessed at the time.
Cretins.
Mr. P, Bercow's an arse. His behaviour over the new clerk is dubious at best.
They call themselves those kind of names for a reason. Regardless of whether or not they are genuinely religious - whatever that means - a reason for using those sort of names exists.
Even if it's just marketing there's a reason that particular marketing works and so the political class quibbling over whether it's genuinely religious or not - whatever that means - is a red herring.
http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/002037.html#more
'Over the course of the parliament the coalition will have tightened by 7% of GDP,'
'It is important to be aware, however, that the goalposts have been moved.
They were moved in November 2011 when the OBR changed its view on the economy’s productive potential, so more of the deficit was deemed to be structural – and thus requiring tax hikes or spending cuts – and less of it cyclical, in other words disappearing with the recovery.'
'By 2018-19, according to the IFS, a deficit reduction programme equivalent to 11.5% of GDP will have been achieved. Apart from in the special conditions of moving from war to peace, I do not think that has ever been done before.'
May I request again a copy of the Tory party's longtermeconomicplan or is it a work of fiction?
Different analysis must be applied to opinion polls. See Fisher, etc.
As the election approaches we're back to my Qxbridge PPE multi millionaire is better than your Oxbridge PPE multi millionaire
@ThomasNashe
Just to add I agree that Islam in itself isn't the direct cause of the large-scale jihadist problem but the way the political class bends over backwards to prevent discussing it is an example of how the political class won't deal with problems that contradict PC so those problems get bigger over time.